“I haven’t seen any figures but when I visited an EE store to see how fast it was all I saw was technofreaks in there," said Colao. "I haven’t heard any calls from friends, colleagues of businesses that we need this fast internet. With the increase in data speeds of HSPA+ (a faster version of 3G), an early LTE network won’t be much different.”

Let me just start by saying that calling potential customers "technofreaks" or any word combination with "freak" is not a marketing win.As to the shortsightedness. Just like mobile phones killed land lines by allowing you to take your phone with you, mobile internet has the chance to out-compete cable and DSL, IF they are able to offer sufficient speeds to make 24/7 tethering viable.

Mobile internet is nowhere near being able to out-compete cable and DSL, let alone fiber-optic connectivity. Wireless is simply not reliable, and latencies are far higher. Wireless is beneficial for areas where there is no other alternative, or where DSL/cable connectivity is poor due to old and/or bare-bones infrastructure, but realistically you could build out a faster DSL/cable/fiber infrastructure that's going to be far more capable.

The only reason we're still stuck with basic DSL/cable internet services and corresponding bandwidths that wireless can be competitive with is because wireless has been so lucrative for communication companies that they have shifted their wireline business to the back-burners (if not ditching them entirely). It's not because wireless can compete with modern high-speed wired internet technologies for bandwidth and latencies.

Plus, congestion is already an issue on HSPA+ and LTE networks. Can you imagine how much worse it would be if everybody was also doing all their home internet browsing/Netflix/Hulu/Xbox Live on wireless?

There is no question that true LTE, even this first version, is much faster. Despite the unreliability of wireless, which includes WiFi, it's much faster than the fastest DSL, which tops out at 6Mbs. I'm getting between 11 Mbs and 25Mbs on my devices, with the iPad through AT&T and the iPhone through Verizon. Most cable services people get are between 10-15 Mbs, so this certainly competes well. Even with FIOS, most people choose the 15Mps service.

So called 4G isn't as fast, but can still be pretty good.

The problem with mobile speeds isn't the service right now, but the more limited capability of the low powered devices themselves, which limit the practical usable download speeds. As phones and tablets continue to get faster, so will their over the air performance. That's why we see big improvements in Internet browser tests each generation. Part of that is the software, and part is the hardware. In another few years, when cell speeds reach 100Mbs, And the hardware is much more capable, you'll find that it outperforms what you have at home by a good bit.

Maybe in your area, DSL is capped at 6mbps, but I have a 20mbps and my brother 1.5 miles away has 40m down/ 20 m up. I have LTE on my GNEX, and while it is nice, it is still not as responsive as my DSL. There are places where I can get faster speed, but many places it is at best a wash.

With what the providers are charging for data, I am not sure I want any faster connections at this point. 100MBps would mean I would hit a cap in 20minutes instead of 2 hours.